Archive for September 25, 2012

“On Psywar against the Innocent”

Global Research, September 24, 2012
mind

When freedom of expression is used to incite the public to hatred of a national, religious, racial or ethnic group it becomes a crime. According to Article 20 of the U.N.’s “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” :

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

This doesn’t contradict rights of freedom of expression. It attempts to constrain agendas of hatred. It is possible that any program of military propaganda or psywar against groups or nations is fundamentally illegal. Attempts to defend extreme hate crimes as within our rights of free speech encourages censorship, which encourages repression.

A video of U.S. origin, “Innocence of Muslims,” the trailer to a film defaming and sexually deriding the Prohet Mohammed, has of course resulted in protest by Muslims worldwide. Why isn’t everyone protesting ? The trailer is intensively offensive to human values, lacks redeeming artistic merit, and is recognizably propaganda. In California a judge refused to ban “Innocence of Muslims” from youtube, on the grounds that suppression would violate U.S. guarantees of free speech.

In France Charlie Hebdo has published on its cover a cartoon caricature depicting Islam’s Prophet naked in a distorted sexual posture. The effect is despicable and intended. The original issue sold out and despite the anxiety of the country’s 4 million Muslims, Charlie Hebdo ran the cartoon again. While France is sensitive to religious laws (abortions don’t appear in French literature), it hasn’t charged the editors of Charlie Hebdo with a hate crime, and instead closed French embassies and schools in twenty countries. Domestically any protests against the Charlie Hebdo cartoon, or against the American video/film, are banned.  In Germany there are debates about whether the film should be allowed at cinemas or not.

To step back in history: in 2005 a cartoon of the Prophet by a Dutch cartoonist caused global protest by Muslims. The effect of his cartoon was compounded by selection of Islamic countries as NATO’s preferred military targets as well as the occupation of Iraq. Internationally the humour of blasphemous cartoons is lost on people who live by their religions, particularly when their co-religionists are slaughtered for profit.

Europe can’t be considered unwitting in the uses of cartoons as weaponry. Starting in about 1934 a campaign of cartoons attacking Judaism became a singularly Nazi tool in propaganda programs which became extermination programs. A similarity compounds in that both the U.S. video and the French cartoon are semi-pornographic in deriding their target sexually. Sexual derision as propaganda was introduced to the world by Julius Streicher, editor of Der Stuermer, the Nazi organ which published cartoons of Jews defined to caricature. A note from  The Black Book, originally compiled by the Soviet Union’s Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee starting in 1942:

For the first time in history, pornography was made an instrument of national education when Julius Streicher became editor of Der Stuermer and head of the publishing house Stuermer Verlag. Streicher, governor of Franconia, publicly honored by Hitler, was charged with the task of turnng men in swine. Sadism and morbid sexual suggestions were the means. No under-the-counter sales were made of his perversely sensational literature, but rather by advertising and even by edict was it disseminated throughout Germany….Der Stuermer claims that the Jewish religion by its laws imposes sexual crimes on its believers.”

The video trailer of  “Innocence of Muslims” strums these chords. In every country of the world, Muslims have the courge to protest the ugliness. Aside from being a blasphemy within Islam, the singular derision of the Prophet extends to the entire religious group. It isn’t only propaganda but hate propaganda, and the occasional violence of the response a measure of the propaganda’s damage and effectiveness.

“Innocence of Muslims” has its predecessor in the film Fitna made by Netherlands MP Geert Wilders, who rose to a seat in Dutch Parliament by increasing Islamophobia and gathering its support. In February 2009 Wilders showed the film to members of the U.S. Congress. In Canada as the Conservative government contributed to the illegal bombing of Libya, Mr. Wilders shared his opinion of Mohammed on May 9th, 2011 in Toronto, then on May 10 from Ottawa’s National Arts Center. Although Wilders was acquitted of hate speech in the Netherlands, moments of his warnings against Islamizaton are provocative deep insults. Canada’s laws against hate speech were not applied and he was given police protection. When the banner of freedom of speech yields a serious hate crime, repeatedly without prosecution, the campaign is sanctioned by the State.

Citizens of Western nations where ‘sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me,’ are slow to realize the sensitivity of Islam to symbolism, if not  somewhat numb to religion in general. In the 1980′s Islamic fundamentalist threats against Salmon Rushdie may have seemed a ridiculous response to his manner of questioning authority. After strong warnings, his “Satanic Verses” was used in a worldwide marketing campaign with predictable results. Some indication of an agitprop campaign was there in the effective marshalling of England’s and North American literary communities to Rushdie’s defense, in a “which side are you on” equation useful to warriors, less so to intellectuals. The rise of Islamophobia inerfaces neatly with U.S. and Coaliton bombing of Iraq in 1990-91, and the subsequent military policies against Islamic nations. The defense of Rushdie’s literary merit and rights, was followed by the demonization of Saddam Hussein and five Hiroshima’s worth of ordinance dropped on a Muslim culture in 1990 and 91, initial steps in the destruction of Iraq’s national group, museums, culture, people.

Because in 2012, the U.S. and France refuse to assert  domestic laws against hate crimes in response to ongoing violations of Muslims’  civil, religions and political rights, the propaganda continues with State sanction. In France, the government’s responses to Hebdo and the anti-Islamic film contribute to isolating Muslims from their national fabric. It has the same effect as adopting anti-burqa legislation. In North America the ongoing extreme abuses of Islamic culture, both through crimes of foreign policy, but more immediately in the military’s and legal system’s treatment of individual Muslims, are normalized. The appearance of widely publicized hate crimes, masquerading as the flux of free expression,  warns one as a prelude to another step in another illegal war targeting hundreds of thousand of innocent civilians.

When we speak of Hitler’s “War against the Jews,”  we are using a figure of speech. It was a war against unarmed men, against women and children, carried on by an army of many millions  of highly expert soldiers using all the destructive techniques of modern military science…           – The Black Book

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

US War Agenda: Coke or Goldman Sachs, What’s Your Poison?

Global Research, September 24, 2012

Who in their right mind would be prepared to fight and die for Shell, Chevron or Coca Cola? Who with half a brain would choose to put their life on the line for Goldman Sachs, Bank of America or General Electric? Any volunteers? I’m guessing there wouldn’t be many.

Then again, I could be wrong. Think of the tens of thousands of NATO troops who over the last decade have been in Afghanistan or Iraq. Drunk on the potent aphrodisiac of nationalism and a military that sells life in the armed forces as resembling some computer game reality, young mainly working class men have lined up in their droves to put their lives on the line for their respective governments.

Enticed by the glamour of armed forces’ adverts that proclaim ‘see the world’ or ‘learn a trade’ in an era of severe economic downturn, when few poorer people have little chance of doing either, ‘serving queen and country’ (or some other nationalistic slogan) seems like a good option.

This form of economic conscription has meant no shortage of young men signing up to fight wars in far away lands. Sold under the outright lie of ‘protecting democracy’, ‘humanitarian intervention’ or another apparent high-minded falsehood, thousands have gone off to kill and die and pledge allegiance to a ‘greater good’.

But it’s not the greater good of humankind, queen, flag or country that is at stake. Forget about blurry eyed nationalism or idealism. These young men are spilling their own blood and the blood of countless others on behalf of corporate interests.

Western ‘liberal democracy’ has nothing to do with empowering people and everything to do with enslaving them and making them blind to the chains that bind them. It is the powerful foundations and think tanks headed or funded by private corporations that drive US policies and its war agenda.

In his Global Research article ‘Tipping the balance of power’ ( 23 Sept), Tony Cartalucci highlights how, through their funding or by direct membership of various foundations, think tanks and government bodies, US domestic and foreign policies are formulated to serve corporate interests. It is the Brookings Institute, International Crisis Group and Council on Foreign Relations, among others, where the real heart of the US government lies. In Britain, Chatham House plays a similar role.

It is not without good reason that former CIA ‘asset’ Susan Linduar claimed that US oil giants Chevron and Occidental Petroleum exerted pressure on Washington to remove Gadhaffi from power because he was supposedly was exerting heavy pressure on US and British oil companies to cough up special fees and kick backs to cover the costs of Libya’s reimbursement to the families of the Pan Am plane that blew up over Lockerbie. On Washington’s nod, tens of thousands of Libyans subsequently paid the price with their lives

John Perkins book ‘Confessions of an Economic Hitman’ details how poorer countries have been neo-colonised by a cabal of US corporations, banks and government agencies. This is achieved via a combination of targeted assassinations, bribery, deceit and financial loans leading to debt dependency. If all of that fails, the troops are then sent in under the banner of ‘humanitarianism’ or protecting ‘national security’. Corporate America has been the leading hand in virtually every US led conflict since 1945, from Guatemala in the 1950s right up to Syria today.

Who but a misinformed and brainwashed public would think for one minute that such corporations and their foundations, institutes and agencies would let ordinary folk have any say in policies that would adversely affect their power or enormous wealth? There is no way they will allow any genuine form of democracy that could disrupt their aims. What is required and achieved is an ignorant and misinformed public that places an X on a ballot form every four years in favour of competing corporate-sponsored politicians. A public that readily lines up to support the corporate war agenda, and a public from which a cannon fodder army of young men is recruited to die on the battlefields of Asia.

And as those young men are delivered to their families inside a wooden box or return home suffering from the long term effects of using weapons that contained depleted uranium, there can only be one thought among decent minded folk – ‘what a waste.’

But young men being carted away in a body bag or suffering from life long illnesses means nothing to the men these wars are fought for. They are just ‘collateral damage’ in pursuit of the ‘greater good’. Not the greater good of lofty idealism. But the corporate brand of ‘greater good’ – greed, resource grabs, ever more profits and ever more power.

The mainstream media glorifies the military at every available opportunity. Obama calls armed forces personnel ‘the real patriots’. In Britain they are ‘our brave lads’. Such rhetoric serves as a smokescreen to hide the true nature of the illegal, imperialist wars NATO continues to engage in.

For many, it seems strange that our ‘brave heroes’, our ‘true patriots’ who were sent out to kill, so often have to rely on charities when back from the battlefield to piece their health and lives back together again. Not so strange really because, behind the rhetoric, the reality is they are regarded by the wealthy beneficiaries of the war agenda as constituting disposable working class fodder who have no idea about what they are really fighting for..

Don’t take my word for it. Henry Kissinger, the criminal responsible for scorching, torching, maiming and killing tens of thousands is reported in the book ‘The Final Days’ (Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein) to have referred to military men as “dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy.”

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

US Soldiers in Nepal on China’s Tibet Border, On a Reconnaissance “Humanitarian Mission”

Global Research, September 22, 2012

Early this week, sixty-five American soldiers landed in Kathmandu and moved to Dhikurpokhari of Kaski district of Nepal. They are also travelling in Manang and Mustang districts bordering China’s Tibet region. 

Ostensibly they are on a “humanitarian mission” of assessing the quality of healthcare services available to the local people. They have been meeting health workers and holding talks with NGOs working in these parts. This job could have been better accomplished by a team of public health experts in civilian dress.

In reality, it looks like an advance reconnaissance party to evaluate the nature of local terrain and assess possible local cooperation to overcome logistical bottleneck in the event of Nepal’s occupation. Nepalese Army’s senior officer is coordinating with American soldiers; again the coordination could have been better with local public health experts who are more knowledgeable in these matters. Effectively, this ‘humanitarian mission’ appears to be strictly an army matter and it stinks.

The US soldiers have never ever entered a sovereign country on a humanitarian mission anywhere in the world, except in a limited way during the Second World War and that too in Europe.

In every third world country, US Government’s ‘humanitarian mission’ has been a cover to eliminate popular leaders and/or incite civil wars.

Since there is no leader in Nepal either popular or opposed to Western domination or both, that can’t be a reason for the humanitarian mission of US soldiers. On the other hand, the undercurrent of simmering ethnic strife stoked by well funded INGOs and NGOs, USAID, FORD Foundation, Asia Foundation, George Soros’ Human Rights groups and the UN Framework Team could be used as an opportunity to grab strategic territory close to China. The construction of Lily Pad in Gorkha district, of no use to the local civilian population, is a strong indication that the US Government is planning an extremely risky surgery in the Himalayan heart.

Nepalese NGOs, people and politicians should note that Russia has expelled USAID for their nefarious activities including interference in Russia’s electoral process. [1]

Intelligence reports from North Korea confirm that US boots are also on ground there, with the connivance of Kim Jong-un’s sister and brother-in-law who want North Korea to become another star in the spangled banner.  Equaling or surpassing the Korean pecuniary motives, are the over ambitious India educated Prime Minister Bhattarai and his cohort, well known to the Nepalese people. Aptly, a leading Kathmandu daily, responding to Bhattarai’s helpless ‘power is not in my hand’, asked “So, where is the power centre?” Valid question. Since Bhattarai doesn’t know where his power stems from, who allowed the US soldiers on the Nepalese soil is a moot question.  If the Prime Minister approved it then Nepal has a huge problem as it amounts to surrender of national sovereignty.

State of Nepal’s political institutions and politicians

At this juncture, Nepal’s governed under the 2007 Interim Constitution; the mandated tenure of the Constituent Assembly [CA] expired on 27th May, 2012. The mandate to the Prime Minister stands on pretty shaky ground, yet, he somehow managed to represent Nepal in the recently concluded Non-Aligned Movement [NAM] summit in Teheran. Along with him went twenty without people’s mandate. During preparations in Kathmandu, ambassadors of Israel, US and UK made several visits to the Foreign Ministry to dissuade the troupe not to go to Teheran because ‘it’d send a wrong signal that Nepal supports a terrorist state.’ Did any senior leader give a press statement that Iran is not a terrorist state? I can’t recall even one senior politician stating that Nepal is a sovereign state and at full liberty to enter into any relationship with any country including Iran. [2] Only one person Dr Shashank Koirala, BP Koirala’s youngest son, has said “International forces perceive China as the future super power. They thus want to unnerve China by provoking aTibetan issue through the Nepali soil”, as reported in The Telegraph Nepal.

On the contrary, while leaders have been asserting that Nepal is a buffer state between China and India, during the past two decades these very politicians, willingly or unwillingly, have allowed infamous international institutions with known history of covertly engineering civil wars in third world countries, to expand their activities in Nepal which threatens peace and stability in border areas of China and India. Worse, the situation they have created will make life miserable for the Nepalese people and for the ethnic minorities in some of the most sensitive regions.

Learning from history

After the untimely demise of King Mahendra Vir Vikram Shahdev’s in 1972, not one Nepali leader, including the well meaning late King Virendra, has shown the perspicacity of steadfastly remaining neutral in regional power politics panning out now under the Zionist Neo-Conservative sponsored Project for the New American Century [PNAC]. If King Virendra had his father’s insight into the subtle manipulations of the western powers, he would not have allowed Kathmandu to become the South Asian operational base of fifth columnist INGOs and NGO and all the Trojan horses of rogue international developmental agencies. It was King Mahendra who had a consistent policy of keeping Nepal as a buffer state between China and India, leaning towards China, and keeping western powers’ illicit and perverted designs at bay.

Recall that the moment King Mahendra found out that the then Prime Minister BP Koirala had secured arms from Israel to overthrow monarchy he ordered his arrest and imprisoned him for treason. His advisors were astute analysts and nationalists. They knew how the British and CIA had engineered the murder of democracy and violent overthrow of Mossadeq of Iran in 1953 to install a brutal despot, the ‘Shah’ as King of Iran. They also knew that Americans had a hand in democratically elected Pakistani Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan’s assassination to install a military dictator five years later [Ayub Khan] as an agent of chaos in South and West Asia. Throughout the 1950s and 60s, one after another, democratically elected popular leaders were removed or murdered by the same western powers whose soldiers are on ground in Nepal today. The current Nepali leadership is complicit in defiling God’s own divine soil.

Delve into the history of Indonesia where popular leader Sukarno was removed and a brutal dictatorship of Suharto was installed. Both USAID and FORD Foundation played pernicious role and Mrs. Ann Dunham Soetoro, mother of the US President Barak Hussain Obama whose real name is Barry Soetoro and has travelled to South Asia [Pakistan] on an Indonesian passport with his mother, working as anthropologist for the CIA, handed over a complete list of every ethnic group that had even remotest communist leaning. Ann Dunham, according to Wayne Madsen’s sources, was perhaps responsible for a quarter million to one million Indonesians slaughtered by Suharto in league with the CIA. [3]

Complete list of every ethnic group in Nepal by number of households, population, residence, social structure, economic activity, and religious and political affiliations are known to CIA, MI6, and MOSSAD. That list was prepared by the Christian Church under Joshua Project and that list is in the public domain. Similar lists have been prepared for Burma, Northeastern region of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. The Scientific Committee of the Vatican, despite opposition of many Archbishops, approved the use of Genetically Engineered Seeds on 17th May, 2009, and the USAID and MONSANTO have already announced in league with stupid Nepalese Agricultural scientists to promote GM seeds; this will decimate Nepalese population within two generations. [4] Contrary to media reports, the US and NATO forces are unlikely to leave Afghanistan and the US will further intensify Drone attacks on Pakistani people.

Nepalese people should further note that Islamic Relief Worldwide [IRW] working in Nepal is under heavy scanner in India for funding Islamic terrorist activities in South Asia. There are hard evidences that the European Community headquartered in Brussels directly funds their activities in South Asia controlled from Dacca. [5] This organization also gets Wahhabi funds from Saudi Arabia whose rulers are Zionists closely allied with Israeli Government. This network coordinates with the Chabad Lubavitchers and the Tibetan refugee centres in Kathmandu and funds hard drug production and distribution via Nepal which Nepalese authorities can’t control. [6]

 

Nepalese people should watch every move of foreign agencies and that of their politicians carefully. They can’t be trusted exactly as the leaders thousand mile West-South of Kathmandu can’t be trusted by 1.2 billion Indians. Sitting silently in the hope that the current crop of leaders or the ethnic federalists NGOs will provide them with stable and democratic Government is tantamount to national suicide. Trusting European and American institutions to help them would be even more foolish.

Notes:

[1] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-20/russia-expels-usaid/4271094

Most people don’t realize that USAID is a division of the US-Department of Defense and serves the expansionary imperialist agenda of the US Government and their cohorts in West Europe, especially UK.

[2] I don’t have access to all the Nepali dailies. If any leader has responded to the three ambassadors’ interference in Nepal’s sovereign right to decide its foreign policy, then I apologize and stand corrected.

[3] Wayne Madsen; “The Manufacturing of a President”-How the CIA ‘inserted’ Barak Hussain Obama into the White House; Lulu Publication; 2012

Wayne Madsen is a former US Naval intelligence officer and a well known investigative journalist. He has extensive intelligence network in Asia and has the canny ability to accurately predict events by connecting the dots.

[4]   Weaponization of the food system-Genetically engineered maize threatens Nepal and the Himalayan region;  Centre for Research on Globalization; 2012.http://www.globalresearch.ca/weaponization-of-the-food-system-genetically-engineered-maize-threatens-nepal-and-the-himalayan-region/

A recent French study shows that rats fed GM foods develop cancers and vital organ failure. If Nepal’s agricultural scientists, with dollars rammed down their throats, think that Nepalese people are laboratory rats, and they can live with this scenario, then I have no further comments, except that Nepal will be completely depopulated in two generations and that will affect China and India and the entire Himalayan region too. Nepal’s Agricultural scientists can amass wealth but they have no right to kill people in three countries because of their stupidity.

[5] Islamic Relief Worldwide is registered in Birmingham, UK. They are the conduit of European Community funding of social chaos and terrorism in South Asia. India’s Home Ministry has extensive documents tracking their nefarious activities. Nepal should ban their activities but, unfortunately, Nepal does not have a leader who has the anatomical feature of having a spine.

[6] Political Crisis in Nepal; Centre for Research on Globalization; 2012http://www.globalresearch.ca/weaponization-of-the-food-system-genetically-engineered-maize-threatens-nepal-and-the-himalayan-region/

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Does America Plan to Use Nukes against Iran?

Global Research, September 22, 2012
American Public Might Be Shocked To Learn of U.S. Plans to Use Nukes

Documented in Michel Chossudovsky’s recently released book,Towards a World War III Scenario, The Dangers of Nuclear War,  the U.S. has steadily loosened the restrictions on the use of its nuclear weapons in time of war.

Based on the fallacious notion advanced by the Pentagon that “mini-nukes” are not dangerous to civilians, Congress in 2002 gave the Pentagon a green light to use them in “conventional war theaters” alongside traditional weapons. In fact, the so-called mini-nukes may have up to six times the blast power of the atomic bomb that leveled Hiroshima on August 6, 1945!

The Pentagon’s official Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) of 2001 was risky enough. That document created “contingency plans” for an actual offensive “first strike use” of nuclear weapons against Iran and North Korea as well as against Russia and China.  These were adopted without real public debate. The very notion that the U.S. would so much as consider a “first strike” nuclear attack on another country likely would be rejected overwhelmingly by an American public staunchly opposed to starting any war of aggression, much less a nuclear holocaust.

The adoption by Congress of the NPR late the following year legitimized the Pentagon’s illegal (under international law) preemptive nuclear war doctrine both in terms of military planning as well as defense procurement and production. Congress not only rolled back its prohibition on low-yield nuclear weapons, it also funded them. In so doing, it expanded what had been an exclusive presidential prerogative to instead confer decision-making powers on battlefield commanders as well. Thus, a general in charge of a regional war zone, say, covering Central Asia or the Middle East could order the use of tactical nuclear weapons without getting a green light from the President and Commander in Chief.

WWIII Scenario

In 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney ordered U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) to draft a “contingency plan” that included “a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and nuclear weapons.” The scheme identified more than 450 targets in Iran, not just suspected nuclear sites, and was, incredibly, drawn up in the event of a second 9/11-type attack backed by Iran!

Today, President Obama has largely endorsed the same doctrine of pre-emptive, that is to say, first strike, nuclear attack, first formulated by the Bush Administration. Obama has even intimated he would use nukes in the event Iran fights back if attacked by Israel. One ludicrous aspect of the propaganda driving a confrontation is that Iran’s non-existent nuclear weapons program, is labeled a threat to global security while the U.S. calls its own nuclear weapons “humanitarian.”

In sum, at no point since the nuclear bombings of Japan in 1945 has humanity been closer to the unthinkable — a nuclear holocaust which could potentially spread radioactive fallout over a large part of the Middle East and possibly across Europe, Asia, and Africa as well. At the very least, the American people need to know the Pentagon and Military-Industrial Complex are pushing the nation towards the use of nuclear weapons in the event of war.

“The US has embarked on a military adventure, “a long war”, which threatens the future of humanity. US-NATO weapons of mass destruction are portrayed as instruments of peace. Mini-nukes are said to be “harmless to the surrounding civilian population”. Pre-emptive nuclear war is portrayed as a “humanitarian undertaking”.

“While one can conceptualize the loss of life and destruction resulting from present-day wars including Iraq and Afghanistan, it is impossible to fully comprehend the devastation which might result from a Third World War, using “new technologies” and advanced weapons, until it occurs and becomes a reality. The international community has endorsed nuclear war in the name of world peace. “Making the world safer” is the justification for launching a military operation which could potentially result in a nuclear holocaust.

Nuclear war has become a multibillion dollar undertaking, which fills the pockets of US defense contractors. What is at stake is the outright “privatization of nuclear war”.

The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest. The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the world simultaneously.

Central to an understanding of war, is the media campaign which grants it legitimacy in the eyes of public opinion. A good versus evil dichotomy prevails. The perpetrators of war are presented as the victims. Public opinion is misled.

Breaking the “big lie”, which upholds war as a humanitarian undertaking, means breaking a criminal project of global destruction, in which the quest for profit is the overriding force. This profit-driven military agenda destroys human values and transforms people into unconscious zombies.

The object of this book is to forcefully reverse the tide of war, challenge the war criminals in high office and the powerful corporate lobby groups which support them.” (Michel Chossudovsky,Towards a World War III Scenario, Global Research, Montreal,  2012)

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

“War on Iran Will Trigger World War III”

Global Research, September 24, 2012

irannuclearfac

“Our defensive power has been created on the basis of our defensive strategy and the presumption ruling our defensive strategy is that we will enter an massive battle with a US-led coalition.”  Brigadier General Hossein Salami, IRGC Deputy Commander, September  2012)

*       *       *

Both the US and Israel have threatened to implement a preemptive first strike attack against Iran, the consequences of which would be devastating.

Responding to these ongoing threats, Iran’s Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) General Amir Ali Hajizadeh has warned that a US-Israeli military attack against Iran could lead to the outbreak of a Third World War. He also intimated that Israel cannot launch a war without the green-light from the US.

If such a war were to be launched, according to General Hajizadeh, a scenario of uncontrolled military escalation  is likely to occur.   If attacked, Iran would retaliate against both Israeli and US targets including US military facilities in neighboring countries (ie. Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Gulf States):

Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force General Amir Ali Hajizadeh warned the US and the Zionist regime [Israel] that an attack on Iran will likely trigger World War III.

Speaking to the Arabic news network, Al-Alam on Sunday, General Hajizadeh said the US and the Israeli regime may not enter war with Iran “independent from each other, meaning that either one of these two starts the war, it will be joined by the other one”.

“We see the US and the Zionist regime standing fully on the side of each other and we cannot imagine the Zionist regime initiating a war without the US backup. Due to the same reason, if a war breaks out, we will definitely wage battle on both sides and will definitely be engaged with the US bases,” he said.

“In case such conditions arise, a series of incidents will take place which will not be controllable and manageable and such a war might turn into a third world war. That means, certain countries may enter the war for or against Iran,” added the general.

The IRGC commander warned that in case such war is waged on Iran, the US bases in “those countries around us and inside the neighboring countries will be targeted and they will even be threatened by the nations of these very states”. (Fars News Agency, September 23, 2012, emphasis added)

The World is at a dangerous crossroads. The statement of General Hajizadeh must be taken seriously.

Active war preparations against Iran have been ongoing for the last eight years. Since 2005, the US and its allies, including America’s NATO partners and Israel, have been involved in the extensive deployment and stockpiling of advanced weapons systems. The air defense systems of the US, NATO member countries and Israel are fully integrated. Israel cannot act without the support of its allies.

This is a coordinated endeavor of the Pentagon, NATO and Israel’s Defense Force (IDF) directed against Iran. Several non-NATO partner countries including the frontline Arab states (members of NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue and the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative)  are also involved.

Media Disinformation

Public opinion, swayed by media hype is tacitly supportive, indifferent or ignorant as to the likely impacts of what is upheld as an ad hoc “punitive” operation directed against Iran’s nuclear facilities rather than an all out war.

The war on Iran is presented to public opinion as an issue among others. It is not viewed as a threat to humanity. Quite the opposite: it is viewed as a humanitarian endeavor.

Retaliation

The Western media is beating the drums of war. The purpose is to tacitly instil, through repeated media reports, ad nauseam, within people’s inner consciousness, the notion that the Iranian threat is real and that the Islamic Republic should be “taken out”.

Iran has significant military capabilities. The fact that an attack on Iran could lead to retaliation and escalation which could potentially unleash a “global war” is not a matter of concern.

While the Islamic Republic does not constitute a threat to the security of Israel,  Iran’s military brass has emphasized that in the case of an attack on Iran, retaliation against Israel is contemplated, with potentially devastating consequences:

On Saturday, IRGC’s top Commander Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari said an enemy invasion of Iran is possible, but such a war would put an end to the life of the Zionist regime of Israel.

….

“War may break out, but if Zionists [Israeli government] start something, that will be the point of their annihilation and the endpoint of their story,” he added.

Jafari, meantime, underlined that “no one dares to wage an extensive ground assault on Iran”.

The General said if the enemy were wise, there wouldn’t be any problem, “but the problem is that there is no guarantee for this rationality and we should be prepared too.

Later yesterday, his deputy, Brigadier General Hossein Salami, cautioned that any possible attack on the Islamic Republic of Iran by the Zionist regime would provide an opportunity for Tehran to wipe the regime off the earth.

“If the Zionists embark on attacking Iran, it will provide a historical opportunity for the Islamic Revolution to wipe them off the world’s geographical history,” Salami said on Saturday night on the state-run TV.

“We are now through with concerns about the Zionist regime’s threats,” he said, adding that Israel has bitter memories of its last-decade wars with the regional allies of the Islamic Republic, including Hezbollah and Hamas Movement.

“(Given the above-mentioned failures) how does it (the Zionist regime) want to be a threat against the Islamic Republic of Iran?” Salami asked.

He, meantime, underlined Iran’s preparedness to confront any aggression against the country, and said, “Our defensive power has been created on the basis of our defensive strategy and the presumption ruling our defensive strategy is that we will enter an massive battle with a US-led coalition.”

On Friday, Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces Major General Seyed Hassan Firouzabadi also warned that Tehran would reciprocate any aggression against the country with an “immediate” and “non-stop” response, stressed.

“We do not feel threatened by the boastful remarks of Zionist leaders, because they are creatures with deep fright who continue crying out since they know that Iran’s response to threats will be readymade, immediate and non-stop,” Major General Firouzabadi told reporters on the sidelines of September 21 military parades marking the anniversary of the Week of Sacred Defense here in Tehran on Friday morning.

“The Zionist regime officials have declared in their (military) estimates that military operations against Iran neither can be done by Israel nor is useful for them,” he added.

He also stated that Iran’s armed forces today are unpredictable and their strategy and actions cannot be foreseen by the enemies.

The Sacred Defense Week, commemorating Iranians’ sacrifices during the 8 years of Iraqi imposed war on Iran in 1980s, started on Friday with nationwide parades by various units of the Islamic Republic Army, Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) and Basij (volunteer) forces in Southern Tehran. (Fars News Agency, September 23, 2012, emphasis added)

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

When Is A Terrorist No Longer A Terrorist?

Global Research, September 24, 2012

osamaQuestion: When is a terrorist a terrorist?

Answer: When the US government says so.

When the Mujhadeen in Afghanistan were assassinating members of their government and the Russian troops dispatched to support it,  they were, in Washington’s view, freedom fighters,  even as their enemies branded them terrorists.

When they turned against an Afghan government imposed by the United States or revolted against a US invasion, they were once again branded terrorists.

When armed groups battling Gadaffi’s govermment were supported by NATO, they were called freedom fighters. When some recently and  allegedly turned violently against the United States which is now dominating Libyan politics, they are once again castigated as terrorists.

And now, the United States Government through a decision by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has decided that the Iranian group  Mujahedeen Khalq, or People’s Mujahedeen, that had been on the US State Department’s  terrorist list for years, ha now been taken off the list.

That means they will no longer face financial and legal sanctions.

One day they were feared terrorists, the next day they were not. The “bad guys” became “good guys” with the swipe of a pen.

The New York Times says this feat was accomplished through what it describes as an “extraordinary” lobbying effort costing millions over many  years.

Reports the Times: “The group, known as the M.E.K., carried out terrorist attacks in the 1970s and 1980s, first against the government of the Shah of Iran and later against the clerical rulers who overthrew him. Several Americans were among those killed. In the 1980s, it allied with Saddam Hussein, who permitted it to operate from Camp Ashraf.

But by most accounts, the M.E.K. has not carried out violent attacks for many years. While it is described by some critics as cult-like and unpopular with Iranians both inside and outside the country, the group has been able to gather large crowds at rallies in the United States and Europe to press its bid to reverse the United States’ terrorist designation, imposed in 1997.”

The decision comes just before an October 1 cut off date ordered by a Federal appeals court

US News explains:  “As recently as 2007, a State Department report warned that the M.E.K., retains “the capacity and will” to attack “Europe, the Middle East, the United States, Canada, and beyond.

The M.E.K., which calls for an overthrow of the Iranian government and is considered by many Iranians to be a cult, once fought for Saddam Hussein and in the 1970s was responsible for bombings, attempted plane hijackings, and political assassinations. It was listed as a foreign terrorist organization in 1997.

If the State Department does decide to delist M.E.K., whose name means “People’s Holy Warriors of Iran,” it will be with the blessing of dozens of congressmen.”

No less than 99 members of Congress—Democrats and Republican alike—signed to a Congressional resolution to take the “holy warriors” off the list.

Just last week at a rally in Paris, none other than former House speaker and hyper conservative Republican presidential candidate New Gingrich, now scurrying to pay off his campaign debts, was caught on camera bowing to the French based movement’s leader Maryam Rajavi.

Top lobbying firms have been paid high fees for rounding up support for M.E.K

US News explains: “Victoria Toensing of DiGenova & Toensing, a lobbying shop famous for its involvement in the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky scandal, was paid $110,000 in 2011 to lobby for the resolution. The firm Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld dedicated five lobbyists to getting signatures for the resolution, and was paid $100,000 in 2012 and $290,000 in 2011 to do so. Paul Marcone and Association similarly lobbied for the resolution, and received $5,000 in 2010 and $5,000 in 2011 for its efforts.”

Glenn Greenwald has reported on Salon, “That close association on the part of numerous Washington officials with a Terrorist organization has led to a formal federal investigation of those officials,,,, paid MEK shill Howard Dean (a former Democratic liberal presidential candiate) actuallycalled on its leader to be recognized as President of Iran while paid MEK shill Rudy Giuliani has continuously hailed the group’s benevolence.”

The Pro-publica not for profit media organization has also revealed that  a very prominent liberal journalist known for his Watergate reporting was paid to speak up for M.E.K

“On a Saturday afternoon last February, journalist Carl Bernstein got up on stage at the grand ballroom of the Waldorf Astoria in Manhattan and delivered a speech questioning the listing of an obscure Iranian group called the Mujahadin-e Khalq (MEK) on the U.S. government list of officially designated foreign terrorist organizations.

The speech, before a crowd an organizer put at 1,500, made Bernstein one of the few journalists who has appeared at events in a years-long campaign by MEK supporters to free the group from the official terrorist label and the legal sanctions that come with it. He told ProPublica that he was paid $12,000 for the appearance but that, “I was not there as an advocate.”

Bernstein told the crowd that, “I come here as an advocate of the best obtainable version of the truth” and as “someone who believes in basic human rights and their inalienable status.” He also challenged the State Department, saying that if the agency “has evidence that the MEK is a terrorist organization, have a show-cause hearing in court, let them prove it.”

Listening to the talk was a bi-partisan group of prominent pols including ex-New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former congressman Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, and former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.

This is a line up that is hard to rent, much less buy, but M.E.K and its well connected lobbyists have shown how money makes things happen in Washington.

It shows how porous the terrorism issue too is subject to how changes in political fashions, and how little the media knows or remembers and how open it is to being influenced by insiders, especially when there’s money to be paid for a few hours work.

It also shows the politics of provocation in action, part of a larger strategy of escalating tensions. The tactics range from sending a naval armada to menace Iran, perhaps in hopes of staging a contemporary “Tokin Gulf” incident in which any Iranian defensive maneuver –or attack by “militants” could be projected as an act of aggression justifying air strikes and drone attacks.

Even the decision to refuse visas to Iranians coming to a UN meeting seems part of the same strategy designed to show critics in Israel, and Republicans that the US is ready to get tough.

The delisting of an Iranian terror group fits right in to an approach that could lead to a “October Surprise” designed to get voters to rally behind the flag and their Commander in Chief.

News Dissector Danny Schechter blogs at http://www.newsdissector.net. His latest books are Blogothon and Occupy: Dissecting Occupy Wall Street.  He hosts a show on Progressive Radio Network (PRN.fm) Part of this piece appeard on PressTV.com Comments to dissector@mediachannel.org  

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

CounterPsyOps

British newspaper the Sunday Times reported that Ian has discovered an electric monitoring device disguised as rock near the country’s Fordow nuclear energy facility.

The device was found by the members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) who were checking on communications terminals at Fordow last month, the daily reported citing western intelligence sources.

The self-destructing device exploded when the IRGC members tried to move what they thought to be a rock. The device could reportedly intercept data from the Fordow computers, the daily said.

Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Dr. Fereydoun Abbasi had earlier revealed sabotage operations at Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility just ahead of a scheduled visit by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors in August.

View original post 77 more words

Biotech company needlessly uses aborted human fetal cells to test artificial food flavors

Tuesday, April 12, 2011 by: Ethan Huff

(NaturalNews) Senomyx, a San Diego, Cal.-based biotechnology company that specializes in food flavoring ingredients, is under fire for allegedly using aborted human fetal cells to test the effectiveness of its various synthetic flavoring agents. According to reports, the company has plenty of other viable options at its disposal for testing such ingredients that do not involve the moral and ethical problems associated with using aborted human fetal cells, but for whatever reason it has ignored pleas to stop using them.
The Senomyx website explains that the company develops “savory, sweet and salt flavor ingredients that are intended to allow for the reduction of MSG (monosodium glutamate), sugar and salt in food and beverage products.” But the way in which it does this is through the use of “isolated human taste receptors,” which a group called Children of God for Life (CGL) suggests is a deceptive marketing term to cover up their true nature.

“What they don’t tell the public is that they are using HEK 293 — human embryonic kidney cells taken from an electively aborted baby to produce those receptors,” said Debi Vinnedge, director of CGL. “They could have easily chosen animal, insect, or other morally obtained human cells expressing the G protein for taste receptors.”

CGL says it has tried to contact Senomyx on numerous occasions to urge the company to switch to alternative testing methods, but has yet to receive a formidable response. CGL has also contacted many of the company’s “collaborators,” which include PepsiCo, Kraft Foods, Solae, and Nestle. Such collaborators help fund research and development at Senomyx, as well as pay royalties on sales of products they sell that include the company’s flavor ingredients.

Campbell Soup was also a Senomyx collaborator, but shortly after being contacted by CGL, the company indicated that it had officially cut ties with Senomyx over the ordeal.

Besides the company’s questionable use of aborted fetal cells to test its flavors, the flavors themselves are synthetically-derived. Artificial flavor enhancers are exactly what their name insinuates — fake. They typically reduce costs for processed food producers by extending flavors and tastes but provide no nutritional benefit to consumers.

[Editor`s Note: NaturalNews is strongly against the use of all forms of animal testing. We fully support implementation of humane medical experimentation that promotes the health and wellbeing of all living creatures.]

Sources for this story include:

http://www.lifenews.com/2011/03/29/company-uses-fetal-cells-from-abor…

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=1320092

http://www.naturalnews.com/022982.html

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032043_human_fetal_cells_artificial_flavors.html#ixzz27QtOW8qI

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Obama agency rules Pepsi’s use of aborted fetal cells in soft drinks constitutes ‘ordinary business operations’

Saturday, March 17, 2012 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

(Blogging as most people have missed this important report, if your drinking pepsi, read this.)-AA

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035276_Pepsi_fetal_cells_business_operations.html#ixzz27QseOFEn

The Obama Administration has given its blessing to PepsiCo to continue utilizing the services of a company that produces flavor chemicals for the beverage giant using aborted human fetal tissue. LifeSiteNews.com reports that the Obama Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) has decided that PepsiCo’s arrangement with San Diego, Cal.-based Senomyx, which produces flavor enhancing chemicals for Pepsi using human embryonic kidney tissue, simply constitutes “ordinary business operations.”

The issue began in 2011 when the non-profit group Children of God for Life (CGL) first broke the news about Pepsi’s alliance with Senomyx, which led to massive outcry and a worldwide boycott of Pepsi products. At that time, it was revealed that Pepsi had many other options at its disposal to produce flavor chemicals, which is what its competitors do, but had instead chosen to continue using aborted fetal cells — or as Senomyx deceptively puts it, “isolated human taste receptors”

A few months later, Pepsi’ shareholders filed a resolution petitioning the company to “adopt a corporate policy that recognizes human rights and employs ethical standards which do not involve using the remains of aborted human beings in both private and collaborative research and development agreements.”
But the Obama Administration shut down this 36-page proposal, deciding instead that Pepsi’s used of aborted babies to flavor its beverage products is just business as usual, and not a significant concern.

“We’re not talking about what kind of pencils PepsiCo wants to use — we are talking about exploiting the remains of an aborted child for profit,” said Debi Vinnedge, Executive Director of CGL, concerning the SEC decision. “Using human embryonic kidney (HEK-293) to produce flavor enhancers for their beverages is a far cry from routine operations!”

To be clear, the aborted fetal tissue used to make Pepsi’s flavor chemicals does not end up in the final product sold to customers, according to reports — it is used, instead, to evaluate how actual human taste receptors respond to these chemical flavorings. But the fact that Pepsi uses them at all when viable, non-human alternatives are available illustrates the company’s blatant disregard for ethical and moral concerns in the matter.

Back in January, Oklahoma Senator Ralph Shortey proposed legislation to ban the production of aborted fetal cell-derived flavor chemicals in his home state. If passed, S.B. 1418 would also reportedly ban the sale of any products that contain flavor chemicals derived from human fetal tissue, which includes Pepsi products as well as products produced by Kraft and Nestle
Source: NaturalNews

Related Articles: